⚫ which shall not be forgiven you, &c. ?" Moreover, the use of the future tense-" he that shall blaspheme, &c." seems to imply that he did not charge the Pharisees with the great crime. 5. If the Pharisees had committed this sin, would not Christ have limited the commission which he gave to the apostles? That commission was, "go into all the world, &c. ;" would he not, on the above supposition have added, "excepting those Pharisees who have committed the sin against the Holy Ghost?" We think the above are good reasons against the interpretation to which we have objected. What, then, is the sin against the Holy Ghost? We answer, to the best of our ability—It is speaking against the Holy Ghost, his perfections, works, or influences, knowingly, wilfully, deliberately, and with malignant feelings. The sin may be committed essentially without "speaking," as, for example, by feeling or acting malignantly towards the Holy Ghost. If the Pharisees, knowing that the works performed by Christ were the works of the Spirit, had spoken against them and their author (i. e. the Spirit) deliberately and malignantly, they would have been guilty of this sin. If Paul, when met by Christ on his way to Damascus, and convinced by the Spirit that he was the "same Jesus whom he had persecuted," had resisted the evidence afforded, and the Spirit striving with him, and had refused to yield himself to Christ, with malignant feelings towards the work of the Spirit on his mind, he would have been guilty of this sin. If the reader or hearer of the gospel, notwithstanding all the evidence afforded him of its truth, and the striving of the Spirit with his heart, persists in rejecting the gospel, and cherishes malignant feelings towards the truth brought by the Spirit before his mind, he is guilty of this unpardonable sin. May God in his infinite mercy preserve us from everything tending to such an awful state of heart! EPISCOPACY THE BULWARK OF ERROR. What has episcopacy done for the maintenance of the truth in England? I pass by the doctrines that were preached in the establishment of this country during the Stuart dynasty. Neither will I dwell on the teaching that prevailed in that community at that period when methodism arose. I content myself with an allusion to the doctrines which that church is advocating now. What are they? Admirers of the thirty-nine articles, friends of evangelical truth, communicants at the altar of the protestant church of England-to you I appeal-I ask, is your church at the present day the defence of the truth? Your evangelical ministry, so promising a few years since, is almost silenced. An immense majority of your clergy have placed themselves in an attitude of direct, open, determined opposition to evangelical doctrine. The very word protestantism, which is a synonyme for the truth, is abhorred, insulted, and renounced by the leaders of that majority. The church of England, the defence of the truth! When the attendants within that communion listen to every kind of doctrine, from the lowest pelagianism to the highest calvinism, or from avowed socinianism to a bold defence of the athanasian creed! It is no longer a concealed thing, it was recently avowed in the imperial parliament, by no less a personage than the archbishop of Dublin, that the church of England is now divided into two great parties, the doctrinal sentiments of each being as directly opposite as popery and protestantism, and the respective members of which, boldly asserting that they were the only true churchmen, and the others were not. Is this being the defence of the truth? Is a citadel safe when a mutual disaffection prevails among the garrison, and the majority are already prepared to open the gates to the enemy? My christian brethren, it is with no spirit of exultation, with no bitterness of feeling, that I declare my solemn conviction that the majority of the clergy of the church of England do not preach the "gospel”—do not preach the doctrines taught in the thirty-nine articles—and hence that diocesan episcopacy in this land has not proved the defence of truth. If the doctrines of baptismal regeneration, sacramental efficacy, priestly absolution, apostolical succession-if genuflections, crossings, crucifixes, altar decorations, splendid attire, high titles, and princely incomes, constitute the truth-the church of England has proved its defence—but if these things are vanities and lies, as I believe they are, that community has been the bulwark of error.-Congregationalism the Defence of the Truth. PALESTINE. DO is C. 1st Treble. 2nd Treble. Bass. :S.S !m :s :d1 :l f : :1 :f !d : (:d,.d, !d, :d, :d, !d, -.r, :m, f f f f : (:f.f, !d, :d, :d, !d :d :d,.m,!s, d1.d, 'd, :d, :d, !d, :-.r, : :d1l f1 r1 !d1 t :S !f :1 :1 !s :s.t d1 :m1 :s' d1 :-.r1 it !d1 : !m : :m, !f, f, f, !s, :- :f.f, !m, :d, :m,!1, :S !1 :sdt, dlm.m!d :m:s !s -S S !f :1 :s, d, r, r, s, ::d,.d, !d, :d, :d, !d, r, :m, !f, f, rd' t :s.t !d1 :m' :s1 !d' :-.rl :t !d1 : 1 ss.s !s :S :s !m :-.fr !m : :f, s, :f,.f,!m, :d, :m, !l, :-.f, s, !d, ::m,!l, :— : N. B. If any of our friends will supply us with suitable words for this beautiful and popular tune, we shall be obliged. The metre is the same as that in Mrs. Gilbert's beautiful sabbath school song. "Good David, whose psalms have so often been sung, A CHRISTIAN CHURCH IS A VOLUNTARY One of the leading principles of the congregational system is, that every church is a voluntary association of believers. In this we agree with many other bodies of christians, and are opposed only to those who are the supporters of civil establishments of religion. The sources from which this principle is derived are the practice and writings of the apostles, the genius of christianity, the adaptation of the principle to the extension and conservation of the truth, and the early practice of the first christians. The great founder of our religion declares, “My kingdom is not of this world." In his life he exhibited and enforced the principles, in his death he laid the foundations, in his ascension he assumed the sceptre, of this spiritual kingdom, which is one of "righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost." It was the divine purpose, as we gather from the Old and New Testaments, to collect a body of men from the world at large, whose principles, profession, and conduct, should be different from those of other men. The name by which they were in all times to be distinguished are such as to admit of no doubt respecting their character. They are termed 'disciples,' 'servants,' 'children,' 'friends,' 'elect,' 'saints,' 'holy and beloved'-names wholly inappropriate when applied to all men indiscriminately. This sameness of character was to be the basis of a holy fraternization. Hence the uniform language of the apostles when addressing the churches established by their labours. "Such were some of you; but ye are washed, ye are sanctified," &c. "You hath he quickened who were dead in trespasses and in sins." “You who were enemies, and alienated in your minds by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled." Hence also the language of the Redeemer to the seven churches of Asia Minor. They were addressed on the understanding that they had at first embraced and maintained the pure principles of religion, but had afterwards relapsed more or less into their former worldliness. The grounds of union amongst christians are distinctly laid down by the apostle in the following words :-" For there is one body, one faith, one Lord," &c. Feeling alike on all these points, christians in the apostolic age united voluntarily -they met together "with one accord." The attraction and the cohesion of the entire body was spontaneity. Unity of sentiment was the basis of their social intercourse. In some cases a false profession gained admission to hypocrites and dissemblers, but this was no reason for compelling such to join them. All societies are liable to be imposed upon in a similar way; but instead of being a reason for opening the door so wide that all parties may enter, it is one for closing it altogether with a firm hand, until the character of the candidate has undergone a thorough examination and endured the test. This was the principle on which the primitive Christians entered into church fellowship, as we learn from the Acts of the Apostles. This is the principle on which our congregational churches are formed now. None are compelled to join our number—none are persuaded to join our number, but such as afford unequivocal evidence that they sympathize with us in the faith and hope of their calling. The association is a voluntary one, both on the part of those who are admitted and those who admit. There is room for deception with us, as there was in the primitive churches. But instead of making this a ground for less strictness in the admission of members, it is a ground for more; and when cases of deceit are made palpable by a corrupt practice, the apostolic injunction is obeyed: we separate ourselves from such, or (which is the same thing) exclude them from our society by a general vote. 66 These remarks will afford a ready answer to the question, Why do we dissent from the Church of England ?" However varied in its practical exhibition may be the principle of a civil establishment of religion, it is essentially at variance with ours. With the supporters of establishments, spontaneity, if it exist at all, is only an accident: with us, it is the source of vitality. An established religion is a religion of the state: ours is the religion of faith and feeling. The former, even when true as to the doctrines which it involves, makes slaves of servants, and compels its adherents to be friends. The latter, by leaving it to every man's free choice, does all that may be done in such a world as ours towards gathering together such, and such only, as are worthy of christian fellowship. An established religion |